Hi all,
I wanted to give an update on the plan for the meeting next week after our
virtual meeting yesterday.
The original plan for the Feb 2021 meeting was to be a Final Ratification
Meeting (FRM), which would mean that at some point during the meeting, we would
potentially ratify MPI 4.0 and elect officers for the next release of the MPI
Standard. The rules for that are in our procedures document on our website and
it turns out they handle our current situation very well. The relevant pieces
are this:
At the last meeting, we made two lists of items that were not yet fixed. These
lists are maintained on agenda and voting page for the meeting:
https://www.mpi-forum.org/meetings/2021/02/votes
<https://www.mpi-forum.org/meetings/2021/02/votes>
The items that we knew about by the end of the December 2020 meeting -
Everything on this list that was fixed will be voted on using the same rules as
an errata vote.
The items that were discovered after the end of the December 2020 meeting -
Everything on this list that was fixed will be voted on using the same rules as
a no-no vote.
We will construct another list during the February 2021 meeting to keep track
of remaining issues that we see with the document. This list is in the same
place as where we tracked the previous work:
https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/projects/2
<https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/projects/2>
On a separate day from the items in #1 above, we will have a ballot to decide
whether the remaining issues should cause us to delay ratifying MPI 4.0.
Without attempting to editorialize too much (people may vote in whatever way
they think is most appropriate), based on the conversations in the virtual
meeting yesterday, I would expect this ballot to pass. The ramifications of
that are below.
If the ballot in #3 fails (saying the list of remaining items is not blocking
MPI 4.0), then we hold another ballot to ratify MPI 4.0.
If the ballot in #3 passes (saying the list should block MPI 4.0), then the
February 2021 meeting essentially becomes a Release Candidate Meeting (RCM)
like our December 2020 meeting. This means:
The June 2021 meeting becomes the new FRM meeting for MPI 4.0
The remaining items list becomes the “errata” list for the June meeting and
everything remaining on it should be addressed ASAP to allow time to discuss,
merge, and generate a new release candidate document for that meeting
(tentative deadline for PRs to be created would be April 19th, but they should
be created and hopefully merged long before that to avoid similar problems for
the next meeting).
Any new items that are discovered before the next meeting can still be added to
the second list for a no-no vote.
A new chapter-by-chapter reading is not necessary or required.
Officer nominations will reopen and we will hold elections at the June meeting.
If we do decide to delay MPI 4.0, I don’t think the intention is to “open the
floodgates” for every small thing we’ve noticed is wrong in the document. As
Bill has said, we’ll never fix every little thing, so right now let’s focus on
the major issues that would cause problems and keep doing the rest for MPI 4.1.
If there are remaining issues from the previous lists that we’d like to
address, go ahead and create the PR for them and we can make a decision later
on whether to vote it into MPI 4.0 or 4.1. Either way, the PR will be useful.
In order to get through all of the things above and still have time to discuss
the remaining technical issues, we’re going to have to be very aggressive in
our timeline for reading all of the changes since the last meeting. As you can
see on the votes page, we have 76 issues to be read. In an effort to get those
done as quickly as possible, Martin and I will be going through the issues/PRs
and asking for input from others as we go (but avoiding context switching from
laptop to laptop between each issue). We hope this will give us time to finish
the entire set of issues on day one or two.
If there are items that begin to have prolonged technical discussion, we will
take that as a sign that the issue needs more discussion with the relevant
groups outside of the full-forum meeting time, which is very limited. The
interested parties should schedule a separate time to have those discussions
and bring the results back in a future virtual meeting over the next month or
two.
If you haven’t registered for the meeting for next week, please do so now on
the logistics page: https://www.mpi-forum.org/meetings/2021/02/logistics
<https://www.mpi-forum.org/meetings/2021/02/logistics> I’ll be updating the
attendance page periodically, but keep in mind that the process is manual so it
doesn’t happen immediately.
That’s all from me for now. I think Martin had some more thoughts about what to
do with the remaining technical items that he’ll address in another email.
Thanks,
Wes
_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org
https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum
